list_reservations

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns paginated results and lists included fields, but does not mention authorization needs, rate limits, or side effects. The non-destructive nature is implied but not explicit. Minimal but adequate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds important output details. Front-loaded and efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given 8 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose and return fields but lacks details on pagination defaults, filter combinations, or behavior. It is adequate for a simple list operation but could be more helpful.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'optional filters' and some return fields ('guest info, date/time, status, and branch'), but does not add significant meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. The schema already explains each parameter sufficiently.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'List table reservations with optional filters,' using a specific verb (list) and resource (table reservations). It differentiates from sibling tools like 'get_reservation' (single) and other list tools by specifying 'table reservations' and the return fields.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for listing multiple reservations, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_reservation' for a single reservation or other list tools. No when-not conditions or alternatives are mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.